Author Topic: William Thornton - fresh eyes needed  (Read 4489 times)

Offline Laurina

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,906
    • View Profile
Re: William Thornton - fresh eyes needed
« Reply #36 on: Sunday 12 April 09 09:41 BST (UK) »
Thanks everyone for your hard work and persistance - looks like I'll have to send for the marriage cert for some further clues. I hoped 1911 would solve this mystery!

Laurina
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Evie

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,398
  • Barnaby
    • View Profile
Re: William Thornton - fresh eyes needed
« Reply #37 on: Sunday 12 April 09 09:51 BST (UK) »
Hi Laurina

Let us know the information when you get the marriage certificate please and before you go as Heywood said give us the names of the witnesses on Elizabeth's marriage certificate if you will. One could be the elusive sibling or step sibling, you never know.

Evie
Booth, Hornsby, Northumberland & Durham
Jackson, Northumberland & Durham
Douthwaite, N Yorks & Durham
Geldard, N Yorks
Ward, Cheshire & W Yorks
Swallow, Boid, W Yorks
Kirby, Lowe, Studholme, Geary, Emery, Baldock

census info is Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Laurina

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,906
    • View Profile
Re: William Thornton - fresh eyes needed
« Reply #38 on: Sunday 12 April 09 12:32 BST (UK) »
Hi All

Arthur and Elizabeth were married at the Primitive Methodist Church, High Dene, Hetton le Hole in Dec 1910. They were both aged 25 and I know that Arthur was born in Jan 1885. They give there address as 8  ??? Street, Downes, Hetton le Hole - neither had been married before. The witnesses are both unknown to me - James Henry Robson and Margaret Wilson.

Not much to go on.

Laurina
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,847
    • View Profile
Re: William Thornton - fresh eyes needed
« Reply #39 on: Sunday 12 April 09 15:04 BST (UK) »
I thought it looked like 'Minor Street' and I am wandering around the 1901 census (as one does on Easter Sunday  ::)) and this is interesting   :o

1901 : RG13; Piece: 4695; Folio: 53; Page: 30

James H Robson aged 9 yrs with his family

living at 18 Minor Street  ??? Hetton le Hole

Number 8 has a William Gibbon/Gibson with his daughter Margaret Dixon and her children.

May be a total red herring but just thought I'd post it. :D
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline Laurina

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,906
    • View Profile
Re: William Thornton - fresh eyes needed
« Reply #40 on: Sunday 12 April 09 15:49 BST (UK) »
Hi Heywood,

Looks like it could be James - maybe they are related somehow but I can't see it at the moment.

I don't know if the marriage cert for Elizabeth's parents is going to help much as I really need to find the family in one of the three census - it's an awful long wait till the next one!

I did spot a marriage for an Isabella Watson to James Robson in 1890 but we're getting well off course with that one - maybe she remarried and the children changed their surname for the 1891/1901 census - who knows! They should still be on the 1911 one.

Thanks for trying

Laurina
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,847
    • View Profile
Re: William Thornton - fresh eyes needed
« Reply #41 on: Sunday 12 April 09 16:07 BST (UK) »
James snr 's wife was Sarah and there are possible marriages - Robson/Robinson. This would fit in with George and Elizabeth Robinson-lodgers. Their marriage could be Robson/Robinson though so at that point i waved the white flag.

Getting the parents marriage may give clues as to the origins of William and Isabella - parents, place at marriage and that old favourite -witnesses.  :D
On the other hand may not help at all  :(.
It is a puzzle as to why they are nowhere in 1891 and 1901, you are right.
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk